Amador County – A consultant told the Sutter Creek Planning Commission that impacts of Gold Rush Ranch & Gold Resort are certain, but costs are anything but certain, for now. Mark Northcross of Goodwin & Associates told the commissioners that due to the recession, the climate for Gold Rush would depend on making the project feasible for the developer, which would have adverse affects on the city. Making it feasible would mean adding impact surcharges that were unknown, but when the cost was determined, it would make it agreeable to the developer but not to the city. He gave an example of $300 per home, noting that “we can’t pour concrete on $300 a home,” because “we don’t know what homes will sell for in Gold Rush.” He said if it were a city the size of Rocklin or Elk Grove, with 30,000 to 50,000 residents, the 3,000 new residents would not be a problem and “you are not going to break the bank in city hall. But here, you are doubling the population of Sutter Creek. If you do it wrong, the circumstances are bigger, so you want to do it right.” Commissioner Robert Olson asked about adding more commercial enterprises to the development. Northcross said the answer is always typically “no,” though developers know the impact is beneficial to all with commercial development. It’s just that the designs do not take more businesses. Principal investor of Gold Rush, Bill Bunce addressed commissioners saying that the project was actually expanded on request, with commercial space quadrupled and nearly 5 times the original size. He said also that “the staff that the city hires is not going to be working exclusively on Gold Rush,” so the city will benefit immediately from staffing increase. The Planning Commission resumes its examination of Gold Rush on February 23rd. Story by Jim Reece (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
Wednesday, 28 January 2009 01:42
Gold Rush Impact Certain, Prices Not
Amador County – A consultant told the Sutter Creek Planning Commission that impacts of Gold Rush Ranch & Gold Resort are certain, but costs are anything but certain, for now. Mark Northcross of Goodwin & Associates told the commissioners that due to the recession, the climate for Gold Rush would depend on making the project feasible for the developer, which would have adverse affects on the city. Making it feasible would mean adding impact surcharges that were unknown, but when the cost was determined, it would make it agreeable to the developer but not to the city. He gave an example of $300 per home, noting that “we can’t pour concrete on $300 a home,” because “we don’t know what homes will sell for in Gold Rush.” He said if it were a city the size of Rocklin or Elk Grove, with 30,000 to 50,000 residents, the 3,000 new residents would not be a problem and “you are not going to break the bank in city hall. But here, you are doubling the population of Sutter Creek. If you do it wrong, the circumstances are bigger, so you want to do it right.” Commissioner Robert Olson asked about adding more commercial enterprises to the development. Northcross said the answer is always typically “no,” though developers know the impact is beneficial to all with commercial development. It’s just that the designs do not take more businesses. Principal investor of Gold Rush, Bill Bunce addressed commissioners saying that the project was actually expanded on request, with commercial space quadrupled and nearly 5 times the original size. He said also that “the staff that the city hires is not going to be working exclusively on Gold Rush,” so the city will benefit immediately from staffing increase. The Planning Commission resumes its examination of Gold Rush on February 23rd. Story by Jim Reece (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
